On Thursday, October 13, the Supreme Court dismissed an advocate's petition challenging the procedure followed by the Delhi High Court while appointing 55 advocates as Senior Advocates.

The matter was listed before the Division Bench of Chief Justice U.U. Lalit and Justice Bela M. Trivedi, held that

"The instant petition filed under Article 32 takes exception to the procedure adopted while designating 55 advocates as Senior Advocates out of a total of 237 applicants. Ms. Harvinder Chowdhury submits, inter alia–

1. That the documents upended to her application seeking consideration of her case did make out the case for her designation;
2. That the committee was not properly constituted;
3. The panel gave less time for interview and hardly one or two questions were put.

Having gone through this submission, we see no reason to interfere. "

The petitioner-in-person, Advocate Harvinder Chowdhury, claimed she was wrongfully denied the designation as a Senior Advocate despite being qualified for the position. Furthermore, she also submitted that the directions given in the judgment of the Apex Court were not followed by the Delhi High Court while appointing the senior advocates. She also stated her achievements and established her candidature for the designation.

"The Indira Jaising case says that if any publication is done. I have published more than 10. It says you should have personality for law. I have had, I did clear my AOR exam, did my masters. It is misconstrued by the High Court. I have taken just Rs. 10,000 for cases. I lost my husband 26 years ago and did masters. I see whether litigants leave court happily. This part of my personality has been ignored."

The bench, nevertheless, remained unconvinced and dismissed the petition.

Case Details:

W.P.(C) No. 744/2021
HARVINDER CHOWDHURY    ...PETITIONER-IN-PERSON
Versus
SUPREME COURT OF INDIA AND ORS   ...Respondent